block-structured process discovery: filtering infrequent behaviour sander leemans dirk fahland wil...
TRANSCRIPT
Block-Structured Process Discovery:Filtering Infrequent Behaviour
Sander LeemansDirk Fahland
Wil van der AalstEindhoven University of Technology
3
Trade-off
ILPαHeuristics Miner Evolutionary Tree Miner
not fastnot fittingnot sound
not fittingnot sound
not simplenot sound
Flower modelnot precise
a b c
def
τ τ
Sander Leemans 4
Infrequent behaviour
• 80% model• Filtering beforehand is
difficult
• Filter during discovery
Sander Leemans 8
Divide & conquer
{<a,c,d,e,b>, <a,b,e,d,c>, <a,e,c,b,d>, <a,d,b,c,e>}
{<a>, <a>, <a>, <a>}
{<c,d,e,b>, <b,e,d,c>, <e,c,b,d>, <d,b,c,e>}
recurserecurse
a
Sander Leemans 9
Finding operator
{<a,c,d,e,b>, <a,b,e,d,c>, <a,e,c,b,d>, <a,d,b,c,e>}
{<c,d,e,b>, <b,e,d,c>, <e,c,b,d>, <d,b,c,e>}
recurse
a
• Find cut in directly-follows graph• Sequence: edges crossing one-
way only
b c
d e
a
Sander Leemans 10
Inductive Miner
• Divide activities, select operator• Split log• Recurse until base case
?
?
{c,d}{a,b}
{c} {d}
Sander Leemans 12
Inductive Miner - infrequent
• Divide activities, select operator• Split log• Recurse until base case
?
?
{c,d}{a,b}
{c} {d}
Threshold
Sander Leemans 13
Divide activities, select operator
• Filter infrequent edges(b,c) 100(b,d) 100(b,e) 100(b,a) 1
b c
d e
a
1
100
100
100
100100 100
100
100
100
100
Sander Leemans 14
2
5
5
4
2
22 2
2
5
Divide activities, select operator
• Weaker log• Use eventually-follows
relation instead• Amplifies “correct”
edgesb c
d e
a
1
1
1
1
1
11 1
1
1
1
a b c
<a, b, c>
(b,c) 1(b,d) 1(b,e) 1(b,a) 1
Sander Leemans 15
Split log
{a} {b}
<a,a,a,b,b,b>
<a,a,b,b,a,b><a,a,a> <b>
<a,a> <b,b,b>
<a,a,a> <b,b,b>
Sander Leemans 17
Comparison
• 12 logs, 5 miners
• Discover (< 2 hours)• (Convert to Petri net)• Measure
• Inductive Miner• Inductive Miner -
infrequent• Heuristics Miner• Integer Linear
Programming Miner• Evolutionary Tree Miner• (Flower model)• (Trace model)
Sander Leemans 18
Comparisonfitness
precision
generalisation
simplicitymining time
completed
soundness
IMIMiHMILPETM
Sander Leemans 19
Comparisonfitness
precision
generalisation
simplicitymining time
completed
soundness
IMIMiHMILPETM
Sander Leemans 20
Comparisonfitness
precision
generalisation
simplicitymining time
completed
soundness
IMIMiHMILPETM
Sander Leemans 21
Comparisonfitness
precision
generalisation
simplicitymining time
completed
soundness
IMIMiHMILPETM
Sander Leemans 22
Comparisonfitness
precision
generalisation
simplicitymining time
completed
soundness
IMIMiHMILPETM
Sander Leemans 23
Comparisonfitness
precision
generalisation
simplicitymining time
completed
soundness
IMIMiHMILPETM